| Message ID | 5d53a2e3-716c-2213-96e5-9d37371c482c@suse.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded |
| Headers | show |
| Series | x86: compat header generation and checking adjustments | expand |
On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 12:26:54PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: > Use a typedef in struct xen_mc also for the two subops "manually" > translated in the handler, just for consistency. No functional > change. I'm slightly puzzled by the fact that mc_fetch is marked as needs checking while mc_physcpuinfo is marked as needs translation, shouldn't both be marked as needing translation? (since both need to handle a guest pointer using XEN_GUEST_HANDLE) Thanks, Roger.
On 14.07.2020 13:19, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 12:26:54PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: >> Use a typedef in struct xen_mc also for the two subops "manually" >> translated in the handler, just for consistency. No functional >> change. > > I'm slightly puzzled by the fact that mc_fetch is marked as needs > checking while mc_physcpuinfo is marked as needs translation, > shouldn't both be marked as needing translation? (since both need to > handle a guest pointer using XEN_GUEST_HANDLE) I guess I'm confused - I see an exclamation mark on both respective lines in xlat.lst. Jan
On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 01:47:11PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 14.07.2020 13:19, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 12:26:54PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: > >> Use a typedef in struct xen_mc also for the two subops "manually" > >> translated in the handler, just for consistency. No functional > >> change. > > > > I'm slightly puzzled by the fact that mc_fetch is marked as needs > > checking while mc_physcpuinfo is marked as needs translation, > > shouldn't both be marked as needing translation? (since both need to > > handle a guest pointer using XEN_GUEST_HANDLE) > > I guess I'm confused - I see an exclamation mark on both respective No, I was the one confused, you are right that both are marked as need translation. Roger.
On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 12:26:54PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: > Use a typedef in struct xen_mc also for the two subops "manually" > translated in the handler, just for consistency. No functional > change. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> Reviewed-by: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@citrix.com> Thanks.
On 14.07.2020 16:31, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 01:47:11PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 14.07.2020 13:19, Roger Pau Monné wrote: >>> On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 12:26:54PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> Use a typedef in struct xen_mc also for the two subops "manually" >>>> translated in the handler, just for consistency. No functional >>>> change. >>> >>> I'm slightly puzzled by the fact that mc_fetch is marked as needs >>> checking while mc_physcpuinfo is marked as needs translation, >>> shouldn't both be marked as needing translation? (since both need to >>> handle a guest pointer using XEN_GUEST_HANDLE) >> >> I guess I'm confused - I see an exclamation mark on both respective > > No, I was the one confused, you are right that both are marked as need > translation. And just to mention it explicitly - I think the lines could be dropped, as they look to be there just for documentation (if at all). The resulting XLAT_* macros don't get used anywhere. Jan
--- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/mce.c +++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/mcheck/mce.c @@ -1307,16 +1307,16 @@ CHECK_mcinfo_common; CHECK_FIELD_(struct, mc_fetch, flags); CHECK_FIELD_(struct, mc_fetch, fetch_id); -# define CHECK_compat_mc_fetch struct mc_fetch +# define CHECK_mc_fetch struct mc_fetch CHECK_FIELD_(struct, mc_physcpuinfo, ncpus); -# define CHECK_compat_mc_physcpuinfo struct mc_physcpuinfo +# define CHECK_mc_physcpuinfo struct mc_physcpuinfo # define xen_ctl_bitmap xenctl_bitmap CHECK_mc; -# undef CHECK_compat_mc_fetch -# undef CHECK_compat_mc_physcpuinfo +# undef CHECK_mc_fetch +# undef CHECK_mc_physcpuinfo # undef xen_ctl_bitmap # define xen_mc_info mc_info --- a/xen/include/public/arch-x86/xen-mca.h +++ b/xen/include/public/arch-x86/xen-mca.h @@ -391,6 +391,7 @@ struct xen_mc_physcpuinfo { /* OUT */ XEN_GUEST_HANDLE(xen_mc_logical_cpu_t) info; }; +typedef struct xen_mc_physcpuinfo xen_mc_physcpuinfo_t; #define XEN_MC_msrinject 4 #define MC_MSRINJ_MAXMSRS 8 @@ -436,9 +437,9 @@ struct xen_mc { uint32_t cmd; uint32_t interface_version; /* XEN_MCA_INTERFACE_VERSION */ union { - struct xen_mc_fetch mc_fetch; + xen_mc_fetch_t mc_fetch; xen_mc_notifydomain_t mc_notifydomain; - struct xen_mc_physcpuinfo mc_physcpuinfo; + xen_mc_physcpuinfo_t mc_physcpuinfo; xen_mc_msrinject_t mc_msrinject; xen_mc_mceinject_t mc_mceinject; #if defined(__XEN__) || defined(__XEN_TOOLS__)
Use a typedef in struct xen_mc also for the two subops "manually" translated in the handler, just for consistency. No functional change. Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>